WOOLLEN MANUFACTURE. 



the negociation of fir William Godolphin for this felfifli mo- 

 nopoly of wool was not fuccefsful. During the whole reign 

 of Elizabeth, when our woollen manufaftures were in the 

 higheft ftate of profperity, wool and woolfels were per- 

 mitted to be exported. In the reign of James I. and 

 Charles I., when the trade was declining, proclamations were 

 iffued to prevent the exportation of wool, and alfo that of 

 fuller's-earth. During the commonwealth, an ordinance of 

 parliament was iflued to prohibit the exportation of wool and 

 fuller's-earth, on pain of forfeiture of the wool, and a penalty 

 of jj. per pound on every pound of fuller's-earth. The firfl 

 aft of parliament which abfolutely prohibited the export- 

 ation of wool by making it felony, and which could not be 

 fet afide by a royal licence, is the 1 2th of Charles II., which 

 was paffed foon after the Reftoration. 



The grounds of this meafure are ftated in the preamble of 

 the ad : " For the better preventing the lofles and incon- 

 veniences which have happened by and through the fecret 

 and fubtile exportation of wool out of the kingdom ; and 

 for the better fetting to work the poor people and in- 

 habitants of the kingdom, to the intent that the full and 

 bell ufe and benefit of the principal native commodities of 

 the kingdom may redound to and be unto and amongft the 

 fubjedls and inhabitants of the kingdom, and not unto any 

 foreign ftates." Previous to this time, the proclamations 

 and ordinances iflued to prevent the exportation of wool, 

 for the moft part, fignified nothing more than the impofition 

 of a duty or a compofition for exporting by licence from the 

 government, what on other terms was forbidden, under 

 penalties of confifcation, fine, or imprifonment. We have 

 feen that, from the death of Elizabeth to the Revolution in 

 1688, the woollen trade was generally in a languiihing 

 ftate. In the year 1665, Thomas Telham of Warwick- 

 (hire, with two thoufand manufadlurers, left the kingdom, 

 and eftabliftied themfelves in the Palatinate, and commenced 

 a woollen manufafture there, and were greatly encouraged 

 by the eleftor. The ellablifhment was foon afterwards 

 joined by a number of manufafturers from Hertfordlhire. 



During the period from Elizabeth to the year 1668, the 

 Englifh appear to have made no improvement whatever in 

 their modes of manufafture of woollen cloth, whilft the 

 neighbouring nations had been making a gradual progreflion, 

 both in the ftyle of their manufafture, and the amount an- 

 nually produced. It was efpecially in the manufafture of 

 fine cloths that their fuperiority was manifeft. The Dutch, 

 in particular, were far more expert than the Englifh in the 

 dreffing and dyeing of cloth. This will appear from the 

 following remarkable faft ftated by Coke, vol. ii. p. 169. 

 In the year 1668, one Brewer, with about fifty Walloons, 

 who wrought and dyed fine woollen cloths, came into Eng- 

 land, and received the royal proteftion and encouragement. 

 By him the Englifh were firft inftrufted how to manufafture 

 cloth of the beft Spanifh wool, without any admixture with 

 inferior wool ; and alfo to manufafture and dye fine cloths 

 cheaper by 40 per cent, than they had done before. Ten 

 years before this time, it had been publifhed and admitted 

 in England, that " Spanifh wool alone could not be wrought 

 into cloth." It may feem truly extraordinary that the 

 Englifh, who had fo long carried on the manufafture of 

 woollen cloth, had not availed themfelves of tlie revolution 

 in Flanders, which drove away the beft mailer manufac- 

 turers, to encourage their fettlement in this country. M. 

 Hnet explains the faft in a way which is not very creditable 

 to the liberality of the Englifh manufafturers, or to the 

 wifdom of our inftitutions. " It was owing to the muni- 

 cipal laws of England, and its ufages towards ftrangers ; 

 who, befides being doubly rated at the cuftom-houfe, were 

 excluded from all companies or fraternities of trade ; and were 



not allowed to carry on manufaftures as matters or paitners. 

 unlefs fuch as the natives were unacquainted with ; fo that 

 none of the Flemifli raafter manufafturers of fine cloth went 

 thither (to England), their's being a myftcry not accounted 

 new, though very much fuperior to the cloth working then 

 known in England. It was only thofe who wrought ia 

 new kinds of worfteds, ferges, damaflcs, or ftockings, who 

 went thither. The fame policy was alfo adopted by the 

 Hanfe towns : hence the greater part of the vaft and pro- 

 fitable trade, which was loll to Antwerp, centered necef- 

 farily in Holland, where the manufafturers from Brabant 

 were cordially received." This appears a fatisfaftory ex- 

 planation why the Enghfh, in 1 668, were fo much inferior 

 to the Dutch in the manufafture of fine cloth. 



In the year 1 660, however, our manufafturers began to 

 be aware of the fuperiority of Spanifli wool, and to mix it 

 with the beil Englifh, probably in what were called med- 

 leys or mixture-cloths, or elfe employing the Englifh wool 

 for warp, and covering it with weft of Spanifh wool. The 

 beft Spanifh wool was then 4J. and the fecond fort ^s. per 

 pound, and the beft Enghfh is. 6d. per pound. 



It is deferving of notice, that, in the latter period of the 

 Commonwealth, our trade is faid to have greatly revived, 

 but to have fufFered a miferable depreffion almofl immedi- 

 ately after the reftoration of Charles II. In a letter of 

 M. Downing of the Hague to the prefident of the council 

 in London, 1660, printed in Thurloe's State Papers, 

 vol. vii. p. 848. it is ftated, that great quantities of wool 

 were brought fecretly from England to Holland ; and he 

 adds, that the Dutch had at that time got in a great mea- 

 fure the manufafture of fine cloth, and would probably, 

 with Silefia, engrofs alfo the manufafture of coarfe cloth, 

 and leave England nothing but its native wool to export. 



In the year 1662, great complaints w-ere made againft the 

 merchant adventurers for their negleft of the cloth trade ; 

 in reply to which they faid, that the demand for Englifh 

 cloths failed in the foreign markets, the white clothing 

 trade having abated from 100,000 cloths annually to 

 11,000. In the year 1663 our whole exports were only 

 about two millions, and our imports four, leaving a balance 

 of two millions againft this country. It is, however, de- 

 ferving notice, that the number of wardens for the infpec- 

 tion of ftufFs at Norwich being too few, they were at this 

 time increafed from five to eight. A letter on the ftate of 

 trads, publifhed in 1667, fays, clothing-wools were fo 

 much fallen at that time, that the beft Spanifh was fold at 

 2s. zd. per pound, and Englifh at id. per pound. The 

 writer afcribes the fall in the price of Englifh wool to our 

 wearing fo much Spanifli cloth, a great part not manufac- 

 tured by ourfelves, as Dutch blacks ; but it is obvious, 

 from the price of Spanifh wool, that the low price of 

 clothing-wools at that time depended on a more general 

 caufe, affefting all manufafturing countries. To relieve 

 the cloth trade from the great depreffion under which it 

 laboured between the years 1660 and 1678, various fchemes 

 were devifed. Among others, the mayor and common 

 council of London pafled an aft " for the regulation of 

 Blackwell-hall, Leaden-hall, and Welfh-hall, (the three 

 public markets for cloth in London, ) and for preventing 

 foreigners buying and felling!" By foreigners are under- 

 ftood all perfons not free of the city of London. This aft, 

 a moft fingular monument of the ignorance or felfifhnefs of 

 its authors, prohibits the fale of all woollen cloths fent to 

 London, except at the above halls, where certain duties 

 were to be paid upon them, and from whence they could 

 not be removed for three weeks, unlefs they were fold in 

 the meantime to fome draper, or other freeman of the city. 

 The hall-keepers were to attend ttriftly at the halls, and 

 4 N 2 turn 



